New Ork Codex: Final Thoughts

ADHDMuch will be answered soon and I’ll be able to form concrete decisions but until that time I can’t help but ponder a few things with my Ork army in the new codex. It’s not so much about what the best units are going to be or which have become trash as it is how I plan to approach the codex. Let me explain.

I basically have army collection ADD (ACADD?). There’s usually so much about a codex that I enjoy that I tend to buy up one unit of this, a unit of that and ultimately end up with a very hodge-podge collection of units that often times aren’t very cohesive beyond just being cool units to me. I then work on painting up the new units, trying to not buy new toys until those are ready, and by the time I have those new units all painted up I have become frustrated with my army on the tabletop. I become frustrated because my ADD collection method has me all spread out and lists just aren’t working. Instead of then trying to focus my attention, to reign myself in and form a solid list, I find myself not caring any longer and moving on to play a different army of mine while my aggregation wears off. This, as was the case most recently, can be years.

Obviously this is something I’m aware I do since I’m sitting here telling you all about it. My plan this time is to finally break the terrible trend of ACADD with my Orks and the new Ork codex. I know I will want to try every single unit out and scratch-build cool Orky stuff, stuff I don’t need, when I feel inspired but I have to curb the urge and stay focused. I love playing Orks and I do not want to burn myself out on them as I have so many times in the past. I’ve had my gripes with Ork codices in the past and how the army has played in various editions of Warhammer 40K but ultimately it’s been my own doing that has put them on the self.

As for my actual direction and collection focus, it will be on fast units and mechanized units, what I call Speedmek. I really like Boyz screaming up the field in Trukks, Deffkoptas, Wartrakks…the fast fragile stuff. I also like backing that up with artillery (no shortage of that coming out), Kanz and Dreads. This is lead by a Big Mek, historically, and now with the option of taking Meks on their own things will just come together (I hope). I own these units but, as mentioned, I have one of each unit (except for Boyz of course!). It’s time to step it up and create redundancy and realize that redundancy doesn’t have to equal spam.

Lastly, I’m not one to play the same list repeatedly and I never build an army for a particular list I have in mind. I don’t like to pigeonhole myself like that and I’ve seen so many people who do and then think it’s the army failing them when it’s their list. However, I will be building to a style of play because it’s what I enjoy and it will keep me focused. If I stick to my guns (should I say sluggas?), then the other benefit I will see will be generally doing better in games. I won’t be rebuilding lists week to week to mash in units I want to goof off with because my ACADD had me buy some new toys that don’t fit my collection. Basically, I  will gain a familiarity with my list style and in turn become a better gamer. That’s the hope anyway and the plan. Let’s see if it works!

How do you go about collecting an army? Do you spread yourself around like I’ve done in the past or do you remain focused on a style or list and build towards that?

  • I watched skarcast run the same army list (with maybe substituting one unit) for roughly 20 games. The effect it has on your game play is amazing. You start to learn how each tool works in the list, and you adapt your strategy to make maximum use of those tools.

    In our local gaming group, our necron player followed the same strategy. He started out losing, but the 8th game or so, he was absolutely wiping the floor with us. Same list, just learned exactly how to use it to maximum effectiveness.

    Highly recommend that if you’ve never done it before. It also has the side effect of preventing you from just buying tons of stuff and filling your house with grey plastic. (As you can concentrate just painting the units in that list).

    • There’s no denying the benefit of doing so. I tend to also have list ADD so that’s the other part of my recovery ;)

  • As someone who shares your tendency toward “ACADD” I know exactly what you’re talking about. It’s very easy to fall into having one of each unit in the army and not being able to support them well. One thing that has helped me is recognizing that redundancy doesn’t always mean more of the same unit. Sometimes it can be different units with the same function, allowing you to have redundancy in the list without as much repetition.

    One thing you have going for you is that you already have a broad collection of orks even if it does lack depth in some areas. Almost any new unit you add will be the second or third of that type so you should be able to start adding redundancy without a large investment of resources or time.

    • Exactly. In the current codex I think I own one of every unit except for Flashgitz. So it won’t be hard to focus build it up where I want it. That’s why I figured Orks were a good place to start with focusing on collecting to a certain build.

      I agree about redundancy as well. That’s always been my stance. You don’t have to put down 3 of the same thing to create redundancy. So many units overlap in roles that you can do it without being spammy. The competitive internet scene has just pushed it into spam though because they want the most bang for their buck so grab the most point efficient unit for a role x 3 – or even more now with detachments being what they are.

      That being said, I’ve also taken that mentality to the extreme and often refuse to put down any duplicates. There’s a balance to be had with redundancy and spam.

      • I know what you mean about anti-duplication bias as well. I sometimes resist using popular units/combos or duplicating effective units as an overreaction. I don’t even judge others harshly for taking tough builds so I don’t know why I often feel the need to hamstring my own lists.

  • Sin Synn

    Nice post.
    The Orks really deserve a good Codex.

    • Thanks and they certainly do. Hell, all of the Xenos armies deserve a good codex.

      • Sin Synn

        Yeah, the Beakies do too. All the Codexes should be able to field a handful of decent and fun builds….
        I keep wishing…GW keeps disappointing me.
        And I’m still trying to figure out how Characters are gonna be Lords of War, and how the heck GW is gonna balance that out with all the previous Codexes…if they’ll even be bothered to do that…

        But since GW can’t even be bothered to do proper FAQ’s, this actually has me kinda worried.
        The Ork Codex will contain the Stompa? Ghaz is now a Lord of War?
        Meanwhile, EVERY previous Codex DOES NOT contain the Lords of War available to them.
        Will the Orks end up with the ONLY Lord of War Character?
        Or will GW start issuing new ‘7th Edition’ Codexes?

        Lord only knows, but I ALWAYS have a bad feeling nowadays with GW.

        • That’s nothing new though. When Chaos dropped for 6th they were the first to include their own warlord traits when everyone else had to use the generic ones. The Marine codex came with a formation in the codex when nobody else had one.

          It’s just the reality of the business, being unable to just go and update every codex when new rules come out. I’m not saying they couldn’t, and it would be awesome if they did but this is just business as usual.

          I agree that FAQs would go a long way. No reason the couldn’t FAQ in an army’s Lords of War, formations, etc. Maybe GW will surprise us…

          • Sin Synn

            And yep- I keep hoping!

  • Pingback: Upcoming Ork Codex for Warhammer 40K 7th Edition - CT()

  • Pingback: Orks: First List for Play-testing by Thor - Creative Twilight()

%d bloggers like this: